/m/media

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

I have wondered if it would be more effective to require a team to forfeit any game in which a player paticipates, who tests positive for PEDs. Would that create the peer pressure needed for a PED free game? Would MLB hide results of players on marquis teams? Just throwing this out there.

How it doesn't occur to people like this, or Kruk who made the same point and was praised in some circles as an intelligent person, that Melky would have made much more than 2/16 if he had been able to play out the year performing as he had been is beyond me. Well, I know it's because they're stupid. But why so stupid?

I have wondered if it would be more effective to require a team to forfeit any game in which a player paticipates, who tests positive for PEDs. Would that create the peer pressure needed for a PED free game? Would MLB hide results of players on marquis teams? Just throwing this out there.

This strikes me as impractical. It would probably work to create a "cleaner" culture around the game, though.

Lately, I've noticed a drumbeat for a) tougher, more modern testing along the lines of longitudinal (the current system is a relic of the Steroid Era) and b) a full year suspension on your first positive test. I'd be a-ok with both of these measures being passed, but at a certain point you just have to accept testing for what it is: it's not going to ever make the game "clean", just "cleaner". Making it harder to get a doctor's note for sudden onset low testosterone or ADHD at 33 years old would probably help.

Why penalize the team for something it can't control. I doubt the Giants (or Royals?) knew he was using PEDs. They are not allowed by the rules of the Players Association to test their players more often than they do.

If the Players' Union permitted more frequent testing, would this solve the problem? Would the players go for it?

If the penalty system for PEDs resulted in zero positive tests, would the sports writers say that the system had eliminated PEDs? No, they would probably argue that the lack of positive tests indicated that the system is broken and that the PEDs usage has gone underground with designer drugs, masking agents, etc. I don't think they can have it both ways. The fact that the current system is finding PEDs users should be viewed as indicating that they system is working.

I really don't see any reason to change the penalties--if anything, too severe a penalty for the first offense is bound to create an occasional unfair result for inadvertent use. It may create more problems than it solves. As for Williams main concern, Melky getting paid too much (in Williams' view), I don't think this should be part of the consideration in setting penalties. First, it ignores the point made by No.4. Second, the Blue Jays are free to take their own risks. The Jays have to make their own evaluation as to how much of Melky's 2012 performance is due to PEDs, rather than inherent talent, and the probability that he will repeat a positive test. Some teams will always take bad gambles on free agents in a given year, and the Jay's gamble may or may not work out.

Again, I tip my cap to the Giants as an organization for not activating Melky for the Postseason. That showed a ton of integrity and restraint on their part. And they were rewarded with another World Series championship.

What I find interesting about the Melky signing is that it would seem to mean at least one of the following:

a) teams don't think PEDS (or at least whatever Melky was on) have much effect. Yes, an untested Melky makes a lot more this offseason than the real one but still, two years ago Melky the FA got $1.5 M. Melky just signed for $6 M more than Jonny Gomes. And the Jays are hoping this deal will be a bargain which means they think real Melky might actually hit.

b) teams think the effects of PEDs can largely be maintained for a couple of seasons without using more PEDs.

c) teams have faith that Melky will find undetectable PEDs.

d) or the ever popular that the Jays have just made a mistake or at least decided that it's worth the gamble that Melky is just a PEDs mirage.

I have wondered if it would be more effective to require a team to forfeit any game in which a player paticipates, who tests positive for PEDs. Would that create the peer pressure needed for a PED free game? Would MLB hide results of players on marquis teams? Just throwing this out there.

I think it might lead to teams becoming more proactive about making sure their players don't fail tests.
Either that means stopping them from using PEDs, or stopping MLB from finding out they used PEDs.

[10] ????? Melky performed at a much greater than $8 mil/yr. Even if it was considered a fluke, unrepeatable, his year with the Royals was worth probably about $14m. Two years ago Melky was a replacement level player; the 1.5m was a compromise between the marginal starter Yankee version of Melky and the AAA depth Braves version of Melky. The fact that he only got $8m/yr shows that teams think that the last two years were significantly aided by steroids and that he will likely experience a large drop off.

I think it might lead to teams becoming more proactive about making sure their players don't fail tests. Either that means stopping them from using PEDs, or stopping MLB from finding out they used PEDs.

Can you do this? Not with a CBA, NLRB and the courts.

Unless you have probable cause, no way you're putting a needle in my arm on a daily basis! I would think the Fourth Amendment is fairly clear in this regard.

You would have to claim the ahtletes are somehow so important that their rights are to be taken away with 24/7 testing. Hell, they tried to advocate drug testing of candidates in Georgia in 1997 and the courts overruled it!

Not sure what affect the PEDs had on Melky's performance, but there are reports that he also took a much more serious attitude toward conditioning and game preparation. He certainly looked to be in considerably better shape.

Melky having a good season might actually increase the deterrence for PED use - he will have cost himself tens of millions of dollars by using drugs he really didn't "need" to perform at a high level. Conversely, if he bombs out, he might be perceived as a player still able to cash in on a pretty decent contract based on a tainted year or two.

#16 It's also worth noting that an arbitrator explicitly voided testing clauses that some teams had negotiated with players (back in the Uberroth era). Did not void the contracts, simply struck down those extra testing clauses.

a) teams don't think PEDS (or at least whatever Melky was on) have much effect. Yes, an untested Melky makes a lot more this offseason than the real one but still, two years ago Melky the FA got $1.5 M. Melky just signed for $6 M more than Jonny Gomes. And the Jays are hoping this deal will be a bargain which means they think real Melky might actually hit.

I think the contract shows the exact opposite. A simple regressed 5-4-3 WAR projection (I call it "Dumber-than-Marcel") grades Cabrera as worthy of a much larger guaranteed contract.

+ 14 Bat + 2 Run + 18 Rep - 2 Pos - 5 Def = +27 RAR

On a two-year deal, you'd expect Cabrera to make about 2/25 to 2/30. I would have guessed a contract around 4/45-50 would be the most likely deal for a "clean" Melky Cabrera on the free agent market.

i notice that when fans and media get themselves all Up Set about players using PED, they never ever scream about, say, freddy galvis. after a 50 game suspension, in which his team HAD to find another guy to play his position, they just might could have found a guiy they like a LOT LOT better and freddy might could have had NO job when he got back

so mitch and gang want to suspend players for a YEAR. meaning that anyone who doesn't have a guaranteed contract is out of baseball. and any guy with a multi-year contract hurts his team a LOT more because the team loses umpty million dollars and gets NON of a player's good years.

because this way, that whatshisname guy has to make sure he uses a condom when he has sex or he might could get popped for testing positive for his wife's vaginal suppository.

truth is that what mitch and gang are not just coming out and saying is that they want anyone who tests positive for anything on the list to be immediately and permanently banned and out of baseball and all their contract forfeited. i don't get the frothing at the mouth, but they are sounding like the people who ran the temperance movement with Demon Run!!!!!

they could test the players 4 times a day/365 and if no one was positive, it would be because of designer drugs. they wouldn't be even a little happy if there was no one to scream about.